On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:06:37 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

PS:

The 13 axis cube may be seen here, and it's origin in the
cubic structure of the brain is also illustrated:

http://geocities.com/scientific_proo...od/5X7C01I.jpg
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/EMBRYO.jpg

=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:32:50 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:25:37 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist
wrote:

On Apr 20, 9:53 pm, George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:03:06 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist



wrote:

[Hammond]
Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables; since the testimony of observers is
the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist.

[Immortalist]
If a system observable is a property of the system state that can be
determined by some sequence of physical operations and if there was
no
such thing as an observer, then it is not determined that there would
or would not be such things as observables even if the testimony of
observers is the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist since
whether there is or is not someone existing doesn't determine
determinability and the possibility of abstract thought processes
whether they exist or not.

[Hammond]
Immortalist, thanks for your refreshing post. Out of 11
posts to this target article so far, you are the ONLY ONE
who has attempted to say something on topic. However, you
have COIMPLETELY missed the point!
You have FAILED to distinguish between two fundamentally
DIFFERENT cases:

CASE 1:
If I turn my back and look the other way,
does the Moon still exist?
(correct answer, YES)

CASE 2:
If the human race never existed or became
totally EXTINCT, would the Moon "exist".
(correct answer, NO)


[Immortalist]
Case two depends upon how you are defining "exist"


[Hammond]
NO KIDDING, Sherlock! Can't you get it through your head
that "exist" is, and ONLY is, absolutely defined as: "A
human opinion based on sensory perception". There is no
OTHER definition of the word "exists".


Wrong again, **** for brains!


[****head Heckler]
"Dictionary.com Unabridged: exist

-verb (used without object) 1. to have actual being

[GH]: Only a human can confirm the existence of anything.

Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!




2. to have life or animation; live.

[GH]: Only a human can confirm that life exists

Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!



3. to continue to be or live

[GH]: Only a human can confirm that life exists

Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!



4. to have being in a specified place or under certain conditions;
be
found; occur: Hunger exists in many parts of the world.

[GH]: Only a human can confirm that hunger or anything else
in the world, including the world, exists


Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!



5. to achieve the basic needs of existence, as food and shelter:
He's
not living, he's merely existing.

[GH]: Only a human observer can confirm that anything is
" existing".

Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!




You're a numb ****head.

Since you call your own mental/psychological/social corruption, reality
...... I'll take that as praise.

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:38:51 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:32:50 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:25:37 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist
wrote:

On Apr 20, 9:53 pm, George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:03:06 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist



wrote:

[Hammond]
Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables; since the testimony of observers is
the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist.

[Immortalist]
If a system observable is a property of the system state that can be
determined by some sequence of physical operations and if there was
no
such thing as an observer, then it is not determined that there would
or would not be such things as observables even if the testimony of
observers is the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist since
whether there is or is not someone existing doesn't determine
determinability and the possibility of abstract thought processes
whether they exist or not.

[Hammond]
Immortalist, thanks for your refreshing post. Out of 11
posts to this target article so far, you are the ONLY ONE
who has attempted to say something on topic. However, you
have COIMPLETELY missed the point!
You have FAILED to distinguish between two fundamentally
DIFFERENT cases:

CASE 1:
If I turn my back and look the other way,
does the Moon still exist?
(correct answer, YES)

CASE 2:
If the human race never existed or became
totally EXTINCT, would the Moon "exist".
(correct answer, NO)


[Immortalist]
Case two depends upon how you are defining "exist"


[Hammond]
NO KIDDING, Sherlock! Can't you get it through your head
that "exist" is, and ONLY is, absolutely defined as: "A
human opinion based on sensory perception". There is no
OTHER definition of the word "exists".


Wrong again, **** for brains!


[****head Heckler]
"Dictionary.com Unabridged: exist

-verb (used without object) 1. to have actual being

[GH]: Only a human can confirm the existence of anything.

Wrong again, **** for brains!
Humans can ONLY confirm to the standards and mores of other humans. That is
NOT the same as confirming actual existance!


[Hammond]
We're discussing the case of NO PEOPLE, we're talking
about the case when there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL. Then you
tell me; if there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL; how would you
confirm that anything "existed"? ****head!
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:38:51 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

[Hammond]
We're discussing the case of NO PEOPLE, we're talking
about the case when there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL. Then you
tell me; if there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL; how would you
confirm that anything "existed"? ****head!


But NOT falling into a trap of arrogant ignorance - that mankind is needed
for everything.

How can YOU claim that NOTHING exists - under those same circumstances -
****head?

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:45:57 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:38:51 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

[Hammond]
We're discussing the case of NO PEOPLE, we're talking
about the case when there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL. Then you
tell me; if there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL; how would you
confirm that anything "existed"? ****head!


But NOT falling into a trap of arrogant ignorance - that mankind is needed
for everything.

[Hammond]
Mankind IS EVERYTHING.....if you lose part of your brain
because you fail to reach your full height and weight, YOU
LOSE AN EQUAL PERCENTAGE OF REALITY!
In fact, if the whole human race disappears, Reality
itself disappears along with us.


How can YOU claim that NOTHING exists - under those same circumstances -
****head?


[Hammond]
I can't even make sense out ot that statement.
You're starting to get incoherent.... don't go hysterical
on us just because you're getting your ass kicked.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

George Hammond writes:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:41:52 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond wrote:

13-2nd order factors = 13 Olympian gods of the
Greco-Roman Pantheon

Which god crashed the Dodekatheon?


Modern Science (HAMMOND, 2003) has discovered the origin
of the ancient Greek DODEKATHEON (The 12 Olympian gods).

You can't very well claim that the number 13 is somehow
special to religions because the Greeks had 12 gods in
their dodekatheon, now can you? The membership varied
but the membership was always limited to 12. Look at the
word itself - DODEKAtheon!

And if I was looking for numeric patterns in classical
religions, I may notice that two of the largest, Christianity
and Hinduism, both have a concept of a Trinity.

So let's summarize:

30 Hindu deities - bzzzt. Plenty more, by the millions.
13 gods in the Olympic Dodekatheon - bzzzt. Too bad you don't know
enough Greek to know what "Dodekatheon" meant. Personally, if I
were to cook up an idea as stupid as yours, I may have seen 12
in the Dodekatheon and 12 Apostles and claim the number 12 is
significant in religions somehow.
3 parts of a Trinity: bzzzt. You latched onto something rather weak, 4
Gospel apostles instead.
1 God in Monotheism? Dingdingding! You finally got a number right!

[snip gibberish]

Did you write that program that takes scientific sounding words
and generates syntactically correct but meaningless sentences from
them, or did you get someone to modify the gibberish generator in
the "Hipcrime" program that someone used to flood usenet recently?

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:25:37 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist
wrote:

On Apr 20, 9:53 pm, George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:03:06 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist



wrote:

[Hammond]
Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables; since the testimony of observers is
the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist.

[Immortalist]
If a system observable is a property of the system state that can be
determined by some sequence of physical operations and if there was no
such thing as an observer, then it is not determined that there would
or would not be such things as observables even if the testimony of
observers is the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist since
whether there is or is not someone existing doesn't determine
determinability and the possibility of abstract thought processes
whether they exist or not.

[Hammond]
Immortalist, thanks for your refreshing post. Out of 11
posts to this target article so far, you are the ONLY ONE
who has attempted to say something on topic. However, you
have COIMPLETELY missed the point!
You have FAILED to distinguish between two fundamentally
DIFFERENT cases:

CASE 1:
If I turn my back and look the other way,
does the Moon still exist?
(correct answer, YES)

CASE 2:
If the human race never existed or became
totally EXTINCT, would the Moon "exist".
(correct answer, NO)


[Immortalist]
Case two depends upon how you are defining "exist"


[Hammond]
NO KIDDING, Sherlock! Can't you get it through your head
that "exist" is, and ONLY is, absolutely defined as: "A
human opinion based on sensory perception".


There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe has
been around for billions of years.This means the universe existed before
humans did. So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


There is no
OTHER definition of the word "exists". Ergo, if there are
no humans, then there is no "existence" of anything.
Physics cannot "define" mass, length and time. What is
done is that someone holds up a brass cylinder, a platinum
rod and a cesium clock and says to the assembled human race:
"Do you all agree that these 3 objects are specimens of what
we commonly called mass, length and time", and when the
majority yells back enthusiastically, "Yea", then it becomes
established official convention that those 3 objects are the
"official standards of mass, length and time" upon which the
entire edifice of Science, Physics, technology, economics
and indeed civilization itself is then erected.
Obviously then, the existence of reality itself
(spacetime) is nothing more than a "Human sense perception",
and equally obviously, if Man did not exist, then reality
itself would not exist. That's hardly rocket science!


Since we know that Man does exist, any statement beginning "if Man did not
exist" is meaningless.

It's like saying that if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 23:06:21 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:41:52 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond wrote:

13-2nd order factors = 13 Olympian gods of the
Greco-Roman Pantheon

Which god crashed the Dodekatheon?


Modern Science (HAMMOND, 2003) has discovered the origin
of the ancient Greek DODEKATHEON (The 12 Olympian gods).

You can't very well claim that the number 13 is somehow
special to religions because the Greeks had 12 gods in
their dodekatheon, now can you? The membership varied
but the membership was always limited to 12. Look at the
word itself - DODEKAtheon!

SNIP ignorant twaddle


[Hammond]
The Egyptian pantheon had approximetely a dozen demigods.
The Roman Pantheon had approximately a dozen demigods and
the Greek Pantheon had approximately a dozen demigods, and
the REASON for this is that there are PRECISELY 13 SYMMETRY
AXES IN A CUBE. SCIENTIFICALLY, there are exactly 13
"demigods" in Religion.
The ancient GREEKS were actually one god short. 7%
accuracy was good enough in their day.... modern science
requires greater accuracy, so 13 is the correct number of
demigods.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:45:57 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 19:38:51 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

[Hammond]
We're discussing the case of NO PEOPLE, we're talking
about the case when there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL. Then you
tell me; if there are NO PEOPLE AT ALL; how would you
confirm that anything "existed"? ****head!


But NOT falling into a trap of arrogant ignorance - that mankind is needed
for everything.

[Hammond]
Mankind IS EVERYTHING.....


That's only YOUR mentally corrupt and insane delusion!

if you lose part of your brain
because you fail to reach your full height and weight, YOU
LOSE AN EQUAL PERCENTAGE OF REALITY!
In fact, if the whole human race disappears, Reality
itself disappears along with us.

Just the same toilet crap you've always bellowed .. nothing more!





How can YOU claim that NOTHING exists - under those same circumstances -
****head?


[Hammond]
I can't even make sense out ot that statement.

Of course not - it's based on your own insane, psychotic delusions.



You're starting to get incoherent.... don't go hysterical
on us just because you're getting your ass kicked.

Certainly not by you ............ **** for brains.

George Hammond wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:08:04 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:54:57 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:50:51 -0400, Mani Deli
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:
What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.
Religion never discovered anything.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; who do you think discovered God?
Good point in that hundreds of religions have discovered their
gods although it looks like all of them existed before and
after that "discovery". You should be more specific when you
are specifying which god it is you believe in. Greek, Roman,
Zoroastrian, Norse etc. There are so many to choose from.


[Hammond]
You haven't even read the website and don't know what
you're talking about. The SPOG proves that there a

30-1st order factors = 30 demigods of the Hindu and
ancient religions
13-2nd order factors = 13 Olympian gods of the
Greco-Roman Pantheon
4-3rd order factors = 4 Gospel Saints of Christianity:
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John
1-4th order factor = The God of Monotheism: God,
Allah, Yahweh, Vishnu, etc.

The SPOG explains and proves ALL RELIGIONS.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================



[Doug]
It is pretty clear that you are the one who does not know what he
is talking about. You are ignoring most of the world's religions
and picking a few that you think fit your misguided idea of what
a proof is. You have left out millions of Hindu gods, millions
of Mormon gods, all the Egyptian gods, the earth goddesses,
Mithras (this is where your christian god was stolen from), the
Norse gods and the American Indian gods.



[Hammond]
You're full of it. There is no such thing as any
recognized religion which claims either in it's written
canon or oral tradition that there are "millions of gods".
That's ignorant atheistic propaganda without one shred of
evidentiary support. The claim is illogical ignorance
commonlyu spewed byamateur atheists in college dormitory
bull sessions.
So claiming there are many gods is done by atheists? That
is silly even considering your normal foolishness.

The SPOG of course identifies and scientifically explains
the entire Egyptian pantheon... the 13 gods of the Egyption
pantheon are the 13 cubically intercorrelated 2nd order
Factors (eigenvectors) of Psychometry (psychometrics). They
are (scientificfally) identical to the 13 Greco-Roman
"Olympian gods".
So you can prove the existence of any set of false gods but
you ignore so must not extend your nonsense to the other
gods such as mithras, the earth godesses and multiple other
gods that man has created through history.


Again... you don't know what you're talking about.

I really see why people are laughing at you all the time.
You are hilarious in your delusions. Sometime you should
go look for truth and education.


=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================